As the battle for the gun rages on, an intriguing question came to mind: what if the NRA was mostly black and brown folks, would we even be having this conversation? Lets take it a step further; what if mass murderer Adam Lanza was a young black, Hispanic or Middle Eastern male?

The National Rifle Association is politically and socially powerful, there is no disputing that. They have their tentacles deeply buried in our legislative discourse and have successfully maintained their stronghold through many gun massacres and other gun violence over the years.

Until this latest school tragedy, which is cataclysmic in the scheme of gun violence in America. This time it was mostly young elementary aged children butchered and the diabolical nature of it has sent the gun debate to critical levels.

The second amendment has always been used as the staunch defender of US citizens rights to bear armsall of it, even the high-powered killing machine like the Bushmaster, used in the Sandy Hook school shootings.

After remaining mute since the slayings in Newtown, Conn., the NRA issued a statement Friday calling for armed guards in every school, instead of saying lets address the massive amounts of guns flooding our communities.

But what if most of the 4.3 million members of the NRA were law abiding black and brown folks? (Currently, there are a reported 73,700 folks of color in the NRA. Read more here). I saw a Tweet floating around the social network that read, Let people of color start joining the NRA in droves and becoming gun nuts to protect our neighborhoods; regulation would happen swiftly. In fact I venture further to say the NRA would have died a swift death a long time ago...

I love it when people write on a subject so obviously outside their experience and knowledge. I wonder if Veronica has ever even held a firearm in her hands, much less used one? And I guarantee you that there are more than 74,000 minority members in the NRA (she somehow misunderstood her referenced site) when the rolls are being expanded at a rate of over 8,000 a day.

But what if most of the 4.3 million members of the NRA were law abiding black and brown folks?

If most of the 4.3 million members of the NRA were law abiding black and brown folks, violent crime in minority-concentrated areas would likely be much lower because law-abiding citizens wouldn't let themselves be disarmed with the same vigor. One thing emboldens criminals with guns more than anything else: the knowledge that law-abiding residents won't have have a gun to defend themselves.

Well, because most inner city blacks own ILLEGAL GUNS, so there would be no point in their paying dues to the NRA.

I don’t know the exact figures, but I think something like 70 or 80% of gun murders in this country are committed by blacks or hispanics. And they don’t belong to the NRA. And they do their killings mostly in gun-free inner cities.

Recall the old warning that he who controls the meaning of words controls the outcome of a debate. In the context of Critical Race Theory, this was never more true than in the current discourse about being “black” in America. So, just exactly is meant by “race” and especially, by “black”?

When Nobel Prize winning poet Tony Morrison, who is African-American, can write an October 1988 New Yorker article titled “Clinton as the first black president”, then what is “black”? When the NAACP calls the black conservative Kenneth Gladney, “not black enough”, and “not a brother” then what is “black”? When Time magazine’s Jack White calls Supreme Court Justice Thomas, “the scariest of all the hobgoblins”, saying “Washington seems to be filled with white men who make black people uneasy”, than what is “black”? And when Obama, a man whose mother is Caucasian, and whose father is only part African Negro and and part Arab, can tell us his autobiography that in his youth he struggled with his racial identity before *deciding* to be black, what is “black”?

When Bill Maher, during a panel discussion on HBO complains that Obama’s policies are “half-assed” “because hes only half black.” and that “if he was fully black, Im telling you, he would be a better president.”, and that “there’s a white man in him holding him back”, than what is “black”?

“Black” in all these contexts, as well as Juan Williams’s complaint on Fox News that the extraordinarily lopsided expression of Missouri voter sentiment in August of 2010 rejecting ObamaCare (in one county by 92%) was really about race, is not about “race” at all. It is about ideology, socialist ideology. Clearly, “black” is really RED.

I showed somebody a picture of a semiautomatic rifle with a wooden stock and no accessories, and he said it was fine (I didn't mention it was semi auto).

I showed him the same gun, only with a black plastic stock and tactical doodads, again I didn't mention that it was semiauto. He shouted that THOSE type of guns are the problem in America. I mentioned that they were the same gun; he blustered and muttered.

I've come to the conclusion that these liberals have no concrete plan aside from banning all 'scary looking' guns.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.